Jump to content

Can You Be Sikh And A Feminist Or Not?


cool water
 Share

Recommended Posts

Not sure about the funding etc will have to do a bit of research but a modern white feminist would probably fight to allow a Muslim women to wear the full Burkha in public and in effect they are encouraging the mental attitude of "hey it's my right to be oppressed as long as I choose it, it is OK to be oppressed if I choose to allow it".

On the subject of oppression of women within Islam modern feminists blow a head gasket due to the mental pressure and their thinking gets proper fcked up. :stupidme:

Check this video at around 8mins in, this movie director guy (who died in 2007 from cancer had nothing to lose or nothing to gain from exposing) was a close friend of the super rich rockafella family and he was told about the agenda of what the elitist families have for rest of humanity and how they funded the womens liberation movement to not liberate women but to control the population and break up families. These are the same bankster families that funded 9/11 attacks on america via islamic saudi agents, funded cold war with russia, funded global recession, funded depopulation schemes across the world selling drugs and weapons

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Jacfsing2

Yes, but it's feminism too :) They just want to be equal to men. Which is in our dharm.

I don't know where you are from, but where I'm from Feminism is anti-male
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally believe feminism is an anti-sikh atheist concept, which is dangerous ideology to any religious community that allows for it to grow. Atheists in governments obviously have a vested interest in seeing it flourish because they want religions destroyed and few people in power in government being everyone's parent.

However If your a person of religion you can not reconcile being a feminist with being religious. As most of the worlds biggest religions have scriptures that dictate or guide on gender specific behaviours and roles. As the ancients realised before religion, if you cant control a woman's mind with either physical or mental constraint then you wont have cohesive civlised functioning society as everyone would be free to do as they wish and your population will decrease rapidly with no one looking after the needs of a family.

Feminists believe that men and women are equal which sounds a good idea on paper until you realise what that actually entails in practical sense and how absurd that is for human civilisation, in my view because: 1) we have different physical bodies with different functional abilities so we arent born equal to seed or give birth 2) we have different emotional needs, men generally want to play the field with many whereas women usually need emotional attachment with one person 3) We claim to live in a equal society in the west yet women still want to have their own separate changing rooms, separate sports teams, separate laws to protect them. Still genders are equal? we can safely conclude no.

In Sikh scripture there are quotes that give guidance for women to cover up and dress modestly. There is also scripture quotes that praise women for giving birth to kings but we have Sikh household born females who subscribe to the feminist ideology and will only pick and chose the guidance that they like and neglect guru's advice on covering up or not to drink or not be lustful and cheat around. In feminists mind if men can do it why cant women its their body? if he can jump of a bridge why cant she? But if they were a true Sikh who were taught sikhi properly and had love for their religion over their atheist feminist main stream media brainwashing they would realise that the approval of what their Guru is saying is worth a million times more than what they are currently being told how to think and behave. And there is always a reason why Guru ji is saying things for our benefit that we dont realise until we get older or wiser.

Feminism is not just a women's issue but a Men's issue as both have to agree and act on the idea that women and men should be afforded equal political, social and emotional voices and parts. The people who think that this is absurd are being narrow minded as Khalsa is made of Singh and Kaur not just SIngh , all the rules of conduct apply equally, the requirement for dastar is equal (only humans have created a dhil in this arena look up Akal Takht Jathedar Gurmukh SIngh and what he did and why) Mata Bhag Kaur was a mahaJodha and bodyguard to dasmesh Pita . Women have been called the conscience of man by Guru Teg Bahadur ji who would not be qualified as Sant sipahi ? They have been strategists, leaders and expert rajnitiks e.g. Mata Sada Kaur ji What makes Sikh men doubt is due to their schizophrenic need to compare their women with others and The need to bring up the next generation with SIkh khialan . STOP expecting Us to be acting like MEMSAHIB and expect and support us to be the true daughters of Dasmesh Pita ji and you will understand what true equality is ... the whole of humanity striving towards DEG TEG FATEH.

Women and Men are taught to dress and act modestly , think kacchera is for both not just women. Bothe are taught to be self-reliant , think KIrpan is for both and the hukam KIrt Karo, Vand Chako, Nam japo ...

Western feminism has failed because it has still not broken the females out of being objectified , of being paid less , or having less representation in higher decision-making positions ...what will work is the way Guru ji taught his daughters accept yourself , improve yourself in the Sikhi prescribed manner and duniya will be at your feet none such person would exist to scare or overpower your mind or soul.

I don't know where you are from, but where I'm from Feminism is anti-male

well then veera it is not feminism ... it would female chauvanism the twin of male chauvanism

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Check this video at around 8mins in, this movie director guy (who died in 2007 from cancer had nothing to lose or nothing to gain from exposing) was a close friend of the super rich rockafella family and he was told about the agenda of what the elitist families have for rest of humanity and how they funded the womens liberation movement to not liberate women but to control the population and break up families. These are the same bankster families that funded 9/11 attacks on america via islamic saudi agents, funded cold war with russia, funded global recession, funded depopulation schemes across the world selling drugs and weapons

they also developed the Contrceptive pill to encourage promiscuity to distract the masses from the 'real' issues of corporate enslavement and provide aborted fetuses to sell to labs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Jacfsing2

Feminism means: 'the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.'

words have different meanings from their definition.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Western feminism has failed because it has still not broken the females out of being objectified , of being paid less , or having less representation in higher decision-making positions ...what will work is the way Guru ji taught his daughters accept yourself , improve yourself in the Sikhi prescribed manner and duniya will be at your feet none such person would exist to scare or overpower your mind or soul.

Western feminism has failed to be taken seriously because it retains archaic double standards alongside its supposedly progressive ideas. And the two are totally antithetical. For instance, they demand that women be paid the same as men, and yet they still expect their husbands and partners to pay for anniversaries/restaurants/outings/jewelry. To be perfectly candid, I just don't feel particularly outraged about the wage gap considering that men need the extra money to cover all the expenses demanded by their wives and girlfriends. Chivalry and feminism do not mix. We can have one or the other. Of course females should be paid as much as males, they are just as capable of being providers as men are. But then men shouldn't concurrently be subjected to these ossified standards of gentlemanliness.

Objectification isn't exclusive to womanhood either. The cases of men suffering from stretch marks, caused by attempting to shed their pot-bellies in an effort emulate all the shredded hunks they see on television and in the media, has soared. Objectification is inevitable in a capitalist society revolving around the purchase of consumer goods such as whey powder or lingerie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Western feminism has failed to be taken seriously because it retains archaic double standards alongside its supposedly progressive ideas. And the two are totally antithetical. For instance, they demand that women be paid the same as men, and yet they still expect their husbands and partners to pay for anniversaries/restaurants/outings/jewelry. To be perfectly candid, I just don't feel particularly outraged about the wage gap considering that men need the extra money to cover all the expenses demanded by their wives and girlfriends. Chivalry and feminism do not mix. We can have one or the other. Of course females should be paid as much as males, they are just as capable of being providers as men are. But then men shouldn't concurrently be subjected to these ossified standards of gentlemanliness.

Objectification isn't exclusive to womanhood either. The cases of men suffering from stretch marks, caused by attempting to shed their pot-bellies in an effort emulate all the shredded hunks they see on television and in the media, has soared. Objectification is inevitable in a capitalist society revolving around the purchase of consumer goods such as whey powder or lingerie.

well I know from bitter experience while working for FTimes I was covering the work of a team of four analysts for months on end whilst being heavily pregnant with twins , making up any time I took for my legally allowed doctor/hospital appointments, whilst my manager's other all male team sat around all day looking at page three , or similar online , chatting, laughing, going down the pub for lunch and coming back not fit to do the job yet I was told because you are married and having kids you don't deserve a matching payrise (I was also coming in for system testing on weekends quite unlike them) and told flat out that no you can't come back part-time for a while then switch back to full-time . The arguments you used are out of these guys books, truth is women are just as productive when at work if not more due to internal drive to 'make up' any self-perceived weak points in performance (just as people of colour have to be that much better to be perceived as just as good as white folks) . I don't know any women in my family who make demands for jewellery etc but then if you believe in kirt karna if you are looking after your family and home without wages I would think that is equivalent to working outside the home .(the economic reality most men don't get , if you had to pay for daycare covering the hours of full-time work and travel it is in the hundreds per month). I did my time at that job , sat and worked out I would only clear £5 per month after daycare and decided to stay at home with my husband's agreement since we had a two year old as well .

Old white men are running the corporations and dictating the playing field , anyone these days can be a single parent so that old crock of giving less because another wage is coming in is now done . How dare they pry into private lives of their employees , if a man chooses to spend his money on booze, fags and women or his family that has nothing to do with what his wife should earn and vice versa . In fact given the rise of divorce and abandonments a woman should be guaranteed equal pay so the kids don't suffer if the worst happens and the benefits system doesn't have to take a hit to cover an deadbeat Dad's duty to provide half of the kid's upkeep.

Yes a woman often gets the house but that is usually if there are kids involved , and if the woman is the earner and buys a house when the guys divorces her he gets to walk off with 1/2 the value of the house if there are no kids and gets paid alimony by the woman ,the law cuts both ways . (my friend went through this as soon as the guy got his stamp).

truth is if the woman gives up working outside to do the much more important work of bringing up healthy, productive, ethical human beings to be a country's future she shouldn't be counted as lesser than one working outside the home and since she is not sitting doing nothing if her Husband/partner takes her out is it really unfair if he pays ? if a man became a house husband he would be in a similar situation and I am sure his wife would be happy to pay ... else she would be a hypocrite. Life is dynamic and we have to adapt , the old fogeys must adapt too but they make the right noises but have not done the right thing. we all get the same 24 hours , all of our time is equally precious and therefore logically we should be on equal pegging for equal jobroles however if one person uses their time more effectively they should be given more ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well I know from bitter experience while working for FTimes I was covering the work of a team of four analysts for months on end whilst being heavily pregnant with twins , making up any time I took for my legally allowed doctor/hospital appointments, whilst my manager's other all male team sat around all day looking at page three , or similar online , chatting, laughing, going down the pub for lunch and coming back not fit to do the job yet I was told because you are married and having kids you don't deserve a matching payrise (I was also coming in for system testing on weekends quite unlike them) and told flat out that no you can't come back part-time for a while then switch back to full-time . The arguments you used are out of these guys books, truth is women are just as productive when at work if not more due to internal drive to 'make up' any self-perceived weak points in performance (just as people of colour have to be that much better to be perceived as just as good as white folks) . I don't know any women in my family who make demands for jewellery etc but then if you believe in kirt karna if you are looking after your family and home without wages I would think that is equivalent to working outside the home .(the economic reality most men don't get , if you had to pay for daycare covering the hours of full-time work and travel it is in the hundreds per month). I did my time at that job , sat and worked out I would only clear £5 per month after daycare and decided to stay at home with my husband's agreement since we had a two year old as well .

Old white men are running the corporations and dictating the playing field , anyone these days can be a single parent so that old crock of giving less because another wage is coming in is now done . How dare they pry into private lives of their employees , if a man chooses to spend his money on booze, fags and women or his family that has nothing to do with what his wife should earn and vice versa . In fact given the rise of divorce and abandonments a woman should be guaranteed equal pay so the kids don't suffer if the worst happens and the benefits system doesn't have to take a hit to cover an deadbeat Dad's duty to provide half of the kid's upkeep.

Yes a woman often gets the house but that is usually if there are kids involved , and if the woman is the earner and buys a house when the guys divorces her he gets to walk off with 1/2 the value of the house if there are no kids and gets paid alimony by the woman ,the law cuts both ways . (my friend went through this as soon as the guy got his stamp).

truth is if the woman gives up working outside to do the much more important work of bringing up healthy, productive, ethical human beings to be a country's future she shouldn't be counted as lesser than one working outside the home and since she is not sitting doing nothing if her Husband/partner takes her out is it really unfair if he pays ? if a man became a house husband he would be in a similar situation and I am sure his wife would be happy to pay ... else she would be a hypocrite. Life is dynamic and we have to adapt , the old fogeys must adapt too but they make the right noises but have not done the right thing. we all get the same 24 hours , all of our time is equally precious and therefore logically we should be on equal pegging for equal jobroles however if one person uses their time more effectively they should be given more ...

Your work in the journalist/newspaper trade where liquid lunches are the norm and you having to do all the work may not be due to you being a female either.

Plenty of companies where men have to work extra to cover female colleagues. I have worked with female colleagues who milk the maternity system for all it's worth,getting pregnant, get long term sick leave then maternity leave, come back to cover another pregnant woman then get pregnant again, rinse and repeat. They spend majority of the 3-4 years on nearly full pay whilst practically doing very little work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use